5 ms·
It seems natural that humans have always reproduced until they ran into some limiting factor. No matter how much we conserve, we will just have more babies. T
by doki_pen 16y ago
It seems natural that humans have always reproduced until they ran into some limiting factor. No matter how much we conserve, we will just have more babies. There is an out though. Research suggests that educated woman have less babies. http://www.eubios.info/EJ124/ej124i.htm http://www.eubios.info/EJ124/ej124i.htm . Just imagine a life where no one had to worry about limited resources because there are a lot less people on earth. _That_ would be a utopia.
- a-priori 16y agoThat rule, to reproduce until you reach a limiting factor (food, money, whatever) applied until the introduction of birth control. Today, we see that in places with good access to birth control people end up being quite conservative about reproducing, trending to replacement rates or lower.
- jdminhbg 16y agoActually, that change took place well before the introduction of reliable birth control. See "A Farewell To Alms" for an account of the transition from resource-limited birth rates to the modern world: http://www.amazon.com/Farewell-Alms-Economic-History-Princeton/dp/0691141282 http://www.amazon.com/Farewell-Alms-Economic-History-Princet...
- chaosmachine 16y agoThe problem is that some resources we just aren't getting any more of, no matter what the birth rate is. When they're gone, they're gone.
- eru 16y agoWhich resources? Please name some examples.
- Retric 16y agohelium and plutonium First is lost to space second is actually destroyed. Most other elements can be recycled. Arguably genetic/linguistic diversity might also count. Because the rate of creation of new species and languages is slower than the rate of their destruction. And finally total useful energy supply of the universe.
- InclinedPlane 16y agoPlutonium is not a natural resource, it's manufactured in nuclear reactors. Also, as it turns out operation of nuclear reactors generates Helium (an alpha particle is a Helium nucleus). Realistically we're not running out of Helium, there are lots of sources for it.
- Retric 16y agoUranium 235 / 238 supply's are finite so Plutonium is finite. I used it as an example because of it's decay rate forcing the issue also, using depleted uranium in ammunition is "sustainable" even if there are limits on it's use as a fuel. More specifically Plutonium-238 has a half-life of 88 years and emits alpha particles. It is a heat source in radioisotope thermoelectric generators, which are used to power some spacecraft. Anyway, Man made production of Helium is no where near our current usage levels. Granted, if the world total energy supply was generated by fusion the numbers would be closer. Meanwhile, by 2000, the consumption of helium within the U.S. had risen to above 15 million kg per year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium#Extraction_and_use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium#Extraction_and_use Energy density by mass (MJ/kg) Deuterium-tritium fusion = 337,000,000 MJ /kg, total worldwide energy consumption was 474 exajoules (474×10^18 J) = 1,406,528.19 kilograms / extraction efficiency.
- eru 16y agoI had hoped for something more forceful. Helium and plutonium are quite obscure and we can do without. You are probably right about genetic and linguistic diversity. Though we can also do with less, if necessary. I am not sure about the useful energy supply of the universe. I suspect its true, but we probably do not know whether the universe at large behave like a thermodynamically closed system.
- Dove 16y agoThe point of the article is that limited resources are countered by human innovation. And human innovation is driven by population. In a small town, there may not be enough people interested in computers to even form a club; in a big city, you can find enough interested, talented people to form a business many times over. The explosion in wealth generated by large populations is not something to be discarded lightly.